[neomutt-devel] mutt vs neomutt

[Nicolas Bock]

On Mon, Jul 10, 2017 at 02:33:26PM +0200, ng0 wrote:
>Fabian Groffen transcribed 1.5K bytes:
>> On 10-07-2017 14:13:48 +0200, Nicolas Bock wrote:
>> > On Sun, Jun 25, 2017 at 09:58:39AM +0200, Fabian Groffen wrote:
>> > >On 24-06-2017 23:15:17 +0000, ng0 wrote:
>> > >> Sven Guckes transcribed 1.9K bytes:
>> > >> > install mutt - receive neomutt.
>> > >> > this sounds all pretty confusing.
>> > >>
>> > >> Have you tried filing a bug at debian?
>> > >> I know Gentoo has the same behavior, only with the system I use
>> > >> (and more or less care for neomutt for) I haven't witnessed a
>> > >> mixing of names.
>> > >
>> > >FYI:
>> > >
>> > >Gentoo does not ship NeoMutt, just Mutt, but as done for 10+ years with
>> > >a lot of patches.
>> > >NeoMutt was created out of this situation (only very few distros shipped
>> > >a vanilla version of Mutt), and now has gone way beyond the goal of
>> > >keeping large feature patches on par with the Mutt source.
>> > >The current patchset that Gentoo uses is based on one of the early
>> > >versions of NeoMutt, but since then diverted from the project.
>> >
>> > Fabian,
>> >
>> > how different would you say is the patched mutt version in Gentoo
>> > from upstream neomutt? Are there significant differences between
>> > Gentoo mutt and neomutt upstream?
>>
>> The Gentoo patchset follows upstream Mutt, new features from neomutt
>> have not been patched in, some Gentoo-specific patches are not present
>> in NeoMutt.
>> I have the impression NeoMutt moves forward fast, hence the differences
>> will be big.  NeoMutt deserves to be its own thing next to Mutt IMO.
>>
>> Fabian
>>
>> --
>> Fabian Groffen
>> Gentoo on a different level
>>
>
>We have the neomutt overlay, is someone willing to be the person
>responsible for it (name+email listed) at overlays.gentoo.org so
>that it can be more visible for a start?

I have been using upstream neomutt for a while now without issues. 
Is there a reason we can't just follow upstream?

>The howto is described on the page itself, this is how we did it
>with GNUnet.
>Of course the real move would be to open a bug in the Gentoo
>bugtracker and provide the patches based on the portage git
>for inclusion.
>-- 
>ng0
>GnuPG: A88C8ADD129828D7EAC02E52E22F9BBFEE348588
>GnuPG: https://n0is.noblogs.org/my-keys
>https://www.infotropique.org https://krosos.org


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 981 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mailman.neomutt.org/pipermail/neomutt-devel-neomutt.org/attachments/20170710/834dddc9/attachment.sig>